Draft

Draft

Minutes of ASC OP Meeting

Monday, October 9, 2006, 8:30 a.m. 10:00 a.m.

Hyatt Regency Rochester, 125 East Main Street, Rochester, New York, USA 14604

Loftus C. Carlson Room, Section A

Present

Participants (7/20)

Representing

Committee Members

David Aikens

Zygo Corporation

Sam Bailey

Davidson Optronics, Inc.

Gordon Boultbee

JDS Uniphase Corporation

Andrei Brunfeld

Xyratex

Bryan Clark

Xyratex

Walter Czajkowski (by phone)

APOMA (Edmund Optics)

Frank Dombrowski

Gage-Line Technology, Inc.

Lincoln Endelman (by phone)

SPIE (Endelman Enterprises)

Marla Dowell

IEEE/LEOS (NIST)

Charles Gaugh

Davidson Optronics, Inc.

Thomas Germer

NIST

John Hamilton

Northrop Grumman

Rudolf Hartmann

Retired

Hal Johnson

Harold Johnson Optical

John Knaur

Olympus America

Kathleen Richardson

School of Materials Science & Eng., Clemson

William E. Royall (by Phone)

Eastman Kodak Company

Trey Turner

Research Electro-Optics, Inc.

Steven VanKerkhove

Corning Tropel

Ray Williams

Consultant

Observers (2)

Gene Kohlenberg

OEOSC

James Pearson (by phone)

CREOL

Welcome and Introductions

After some discussion as to whom should be chairing the meeting, D. Aikens opened the meeting at 8:39 a.m. Since there were

new participants, a round of introductions was completed.

Adoption of Agenda

W. Royall moved that the draft agenda be adopted. M. Dowell seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

Approval of January 22, 2006ASC OP Meeting Draft Minutes

M. Dowell moved that the draft minutes be approved. W. Royall seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously.

Reports

Performance Based Optical Surface Imperfection Standard

G. Boultbee continued editing the draft document to include dimensional notation using the results of the Boulder meeting. The

task force made good progress. Most of the meeting was devoted to revising the scope. He felt that the group was poised for rapid

progress at the upcoming January meeting. The Secretary said that if the group is satisfied with the draft scope, he will submit a PINS

to ANSI for the revised draft. D. Aikens stated that he was impressed with G. Boultbee's leadership of the editing process.

Wavefront Specification Project

D. Aikens said the the wavefront task force had a less productive but important meeting. The group identified that it needs two

separate standards in this set. BSR/OEOSC OP1.004 "Surface Texture and Mid-spatial Frequency Ripple." The US has agreed to

develop such a standard to be submitted as a draft ISO standard. It will also be developed as a US standard. The wavefront standard

will use OP1.004 as reference. First tried to develop the scope of this standard, which will be BSR/OEOSC OP1.005. After having

difficulty in defining the scope, L. Endelman convinced the task force that it first must address the purpose of this standard. From the

1/4/2007 02:22:49 PM

Draft Minutes of ASC OP 10-8-06 Meeting.odt

ANSI/OP Draft Minutes continued, Sunday, January 22, 2006, 8:30 a.m. 10:00 a.m.

Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113
purpose the logical scope could be developed. After completing the purpose for 1.005, the task force used the remaining time to

determine the scope for OP1.004.

D. Aikens proposes that the task force begin the January meeting by turning the bulleted purpose into a text document to express

the purpose so that can now write the scope. Both purposes are complete. S. VanKerkhove said that he will convert bullets into text.

S. VanKerkhove suggested that he will take the action item to turn the bulleted purpose into a text statement. G. Boultbee said that the

purpose can become the foreword of the standard.

D. Aikens said that S. VanKerkhove, P. Takacs and he should hold a phone conference before the next meeting to decide how they

will manage the two concurrent activities. He said that P. Takacs is leaning toward an every other month phone conference two move

OP1.004 forward. He reminded S. VanKerkhove that he is the leader of the entire wavefront project, so P. Takacs would be one of his

subcommittee members.

ANSI Audit of OP
The Secretary reported that in June he had a 1½ hour phone conference with the ANSI audit manager and the contracted auditor.

He then spent about 60 hours pulling together the information that they required. He had asked if it would be acceptable to create a

database on the OEOSC web site that conformed to the outline suggested by ANSI to make the documents available for the auditor.

The two agreed that that approach was acceptable. The secretary discovered that the auditor had downloaded the documents off of the

web site rather than reviewing them on the web site. At this point the secretary zipped all of the documents and web pages into a

folder that the auditor could import into his computer so that he could use the web page database to review the documents. However,

the auditor said that he had already downloaded most of the documents and would not use the zip folder. Since the documents were no

longer associated with the outline on the web pages, he had to rename all of the files so that he could relate them to the description

contained on the web outline. He spent a lot of extra time renaming the 110 files, and much of the time the Secretary spent setting up

the web database was also waisted.

ANSI is now asking for a second 1½ hour conference call on October 23 to discuss the audit results. G. Kohlenberg and his wife

were planning to leave for West Virginia that morning, so will have to leave following the call. After this call, the Secretary will have

to write a response document describing what actions OEOSC will take to meet the ANSI concerns. He already knew that he has to

modify the OP operating procedures to meet current ANSI requirements. The draft procedures are loaded on the OEOSC web site for

all to review. After ANSI approves the changes, then OP and the OEOSC Board will have to review and approve them. OP originally

used ANSI model procedures, but ANSI decided that each organization should create their own documents. The Secretary removed

ANSI references from the model procedures in order to arrive at the OP version.

The $6,000 audit fee is now prorated over the five years, rather than being assessed in the year of the audit.
Policy on Training Reimbursement
The Secretary said that the revised document is up on the OEOSC web site. The suggested reimbursement for conference training

is also on the web site. He stated that the OP committee needs to decide if the reimbursement proposal is acceptable. D. Aikens said

that it could be a problem if he is the only one who is teaching for OEOSC. He said that he does enjoy teaching the course. D. Aikens

said that G. Boultbee should be added to the list of instructors. M. Dowell moved that the policy as amended to include G. Boultbee's

name be approved; G. Boultbee seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

ANSI/OEOSC OP1.002 Copyright Certificate
The Secretary reported that the copyright certificate was received the previous week. D. Aikens asked if the class notes are

copyrighted. G. Boultbee said that the copyright notice is on the cover. The Secretary said that since the documents has changed

frequently, he didn't recommend that it be registered with the Copyright Office.

Future of ASME 14.18 Optical Drawing Standard

W. Royall reported that ASME has withdrawn standard. ASME is now deciding they will release the document so that OEOSC can

control it, or whether they want to work on it jointly. He doubts that ASME will want to perpetuate the standard on their own. Need to

give them time to respond to our request.

The Secretary said that he had e-mailed ASME a year ago in June asking if they would authorize OEOSC to update the document.

He then sent another e-mail a week before this meeting to ask about the status of the request. A reply said that ASME was having a

meeting at the time that the e-mail was received. The subject would be raised at the meeting again. W. Royall said that ASME may

have been irritated at the OEOSC delays in providing experts to work on the ASME committee, so it is probably not one of their top

priorities.

D. Aikens surmised that OP doesn't have the capacity at the present time to take on this task. W. Royall said that OP needs to give

ASME time to react. D. Aikens suggested that OP could handle two standards at once. So when the performance standard is

completed, then it could undertake the drafting standard update.

1/4/2007 02:27:10 PM

Draft Minutes of ASC OP 10-8-06 Meeting.odt

ANSI/OP Draft Minutes continued, Sunday, January 22, 2006, 8:30 a.m. 10:00 a.m.

Fairmont Hotel, Cupertino Room, 170 South Market Street, San Jose, CA 95113

Revision of Scratch and Dig Course
D. Aikens said that he would e-mail the latest version of the presentation to the Secretary so that it can be placed in a restricted

section of the OEOSC web site for the committee to review. He took G. Boultbee's version 3.0 for the classes that he had taught inside

JDSU. He made some editorial changes in version 3.1, and has just finished version 3.3, which has the changes resulting from

OP1.002 being released as an approved standard. There has not been any significant content change since G. Boultbee added the

references to ISO 48497, ISO 10110-7 and beefed-up the last portion of the course. He thinks that it is a solid course at this point, and

does not require a lot of changes. However, when the functional portion has been added to 1.002, then changes will be required.

When the course material is available on the OEOSC web site then the whole committee can review it, and suggest any improvements

that the members think would be beneficial.

Did training last year in Connecticut and this year at Newport Franklin. Had one in Vermont was canceled because they sent their

Technicians to Optics East instead. Newport Franklin has asked that another class be scheduled in the spring of 2007 so that they can

have their European suppliers attend. The scratch and dig class is the most heavily attended at Optics East, so it will continue to be

presented there. The class will also be given at the May 2007 Optifab conference in Rochester. The class is still popular at Photonics

West. OEOSC has taught about 200 out of the thousands of US optical engineers. M. Dowell asked how many attend a typical in-

house session. D. Aikens replied that the average is 20.

L. Endelman said that he talks to people in the exhibition areas and finds that not many are aware of the course or the standard. G.

Kohlenberg said that notice is up on SPIE and OEOSC web sites. Perhaps he could create a press release that one of the trade journals

may pick up to highlight the existence of the class. L. Endelman said that perhaps companies don't bother to look at the web sites. He

suggested that others who are in the exhibition areas may also check for themselves how many of the vendors are aware of the class.

He said that those he spoke to were interested in the class either in-house or at a conference. D. Aikens suggested that perhaps the best

place to advertise is through students in universities. He said that two new employees right out of college started using ISO 10110 for

their drawings. The company is now using ISO 10110; he could never have convinced the established optical engineers to make the

switch. Most of the class students are from Quality Assurance organizations who must understand what is being thrust upon them.

Perhaps we should get the information to the Universities of Rochester and Arizona, as well as some of the other instructors at SPIE

training classes. L. Endelman thought that was a good idea. M. Dowell suggested that SPIE and OEOSC could offer scholarships for

students to take the course at conferences. Then the scholarships could be advertised on the campuses. G. Kohlenberg replied that

SPIE does give students discounts. M. Dowell suggested that scholarships be given for less attended conferences where there will

probably be empty seats. D. Aikens suggested the Optics East conference. D. Aikens agreed to ask John Cain what the SPIE policy is

for doing this. Perhaps OEOSC could pay the SPIE discounted student fee. W. Royall suggested that OEOSC give copies of the

standard to university professors for use in their courses. G. Boultbee suggested that the secretary do a press release. M. Dowell will

contact U of A; D. Aikens will contact U of R. W. Czajkowski suggested that M. Dowell should contact John Grievencamp at U of A.

W. Czajkowski will give D. Aikens a U of R contact. S. VanKerkhove said that Julie Bentley from Tropel teaches computer-aided

optical design at U of R. M. Dowell suggested the Rochester student OSA organization. G. Kohlenberg said that the Rochester OSA

chapter has meetings that could be available. M. Dowell said that the students want to meet engineers. G. Kohlenberg said that he was

asked to make a presentation at the Rochester student chapter about what it means to be an optical engineer at Kodak.

D. Aikens asked the Secretary to contact Irvine Valley College and arrange to give the seminar that was requested over a year ago.

He also suggested that OP signs up to present a one-hour presentation at one of these student meetings. When one is secured, then the

group should have a conference call to draft a one hour version of scratch and dig. G. Boultbee noted that it took an hour and a half to

message one paragraph in the meeting held the previous day, so how are we going to quickly put together a one-hour presentation? D.

Aikens replied that he had a lot of confidence in G. Boultbee.

ISO Documents that are candidates for adoptions as US standards

The Secretary reported that the list of ISO/TC 172 standards has been up on the OEOSC web site since before the previous

meeting. There are also a series of US standards that were given to OESC by I

A which are coming up for five-year reviews. He said

that he has not had time to get them ready for OP balloting. He said that he is somewhat leery of putting out more than one document

at a time because the five-year review of the Optical Glass standard is now under way, and G. Boultbee is the only one who has

submitted his ballot. As an aside, D. Aikens asked what OEOSC would have to do to get the glass companies to use OP3.001 in their

catalogs. G. Boultbee asked if the glass companies reference the old MIL-G-174. If they reference the MIL spec, then OP has a

chance to get OP3.001 substituted. If not, then OP would not have success in getting the glass companies to reference it. The

Secretary said that Schott would want to use ISO; D. Aikens replied that Japan would feel the same way. G. Boultbee asked what glass

companies participated in the writing of OP3.001: Schott USA and Hoya. W. Czajkowski said that he did not think that the two

companies adopted it, however. D. Aikens asked that the glass standard be added to the agenda for the next meeting. How could it be

promoted? G. Boultbee suggested that reference to OP3.001 be included in the one-hour briefing on scratch and dig. W. Royall

agreed that when bubbles are discussed that could be a segue to the glass standard.

1/4/2007 02:27:10 PM

Draft Minutes of ASC OP 10-8-06 Meeting.odt